Messages

1

My Media English Watch / Re: The compassionate way of handling semantically messed-up direct quotes

« on: March 08, 2010, 08:02:29 AM »

Let’s start with the ticklish semantic problem in this passage from a major news story that came out in one of the major broadsheets a few days ago:

(1) Philippine Daily Inquirer (Internet edition): Ticklish semantic problem in a direct quote
   
Condom ads ban might curtail freedom of speech, says Roxas

“While it was the CBCP’s right to make such call, [Senator Manuel III] Roxas said it would be difficult if the government would impose such prohibition.

“Like Roxas, Senator Benigno ‘Noynoy’ Aquino III also expressed reservations [sic] on this proposed ban on condom ads.

“‘Kailangang pag-aralan ng konti ’yan. Hindi ko alam kung pwedeng i-ban outright ang ads (We need to study this. I don’t know if we could ban the ads outright),” Aquino said in a separate interview here.

“‘I think there’s still a stipulation that does not allow that unless it offends moral obscenity…,” he added.”

Now, it’s clear that in the last direct quote above, the speaker—unless he was misquoted by the reporter—messed up with his statement by wrongly using the phrase “unless it offends moral obscenity.” From the context of the sentence, he evidently meant to say something like “unless it offends moral values,” or words to that effect...

Reading your “The compassionate way of handling semantically messed-up direct quotes” brought back memories of “The Way We Were” half a century ago when the desk of the Aduana-based Manila Chronicle found itself frequently challenged by questions as consequential as those posed in your essay.

At the time, the Chronicle was the “new kid on the block” that was out to make good its boast as the best of Manila’s dailies. For this purpose, it assembled a formidable desk manned by Luis Mauricio, Iking Santos, Rex Reyes, Mat Marbella, and  Orly Aquino... and a 20-year-old nerd who had a knack for writing “arresting” leads, i.e., me. They were known as deskmen or sub-editors; I was a desk “boy.” I was the youngest deskperson at the time…maybe I still hold the record.

What do we do when presented with a direct quote, publication of which could crucify the quoted? That’s easy—if friend, repair; if foe, let it stand. As for error-stricken “praise” releases, again it depends—into the waste basket, in my case, and, more often than not, into the waistline of some of our more enterprising colleagues. (As for the judge who recently denied being pressured by a justice...it’s absurd—I would have no truck with a story about a denial of something that took place years ago.)

Oh, yes, for a while there I thought I gotcha…see the head of the item on your comment on Jose Dalisay. I was about to say that just as only Pinoys pronounce their currency “pay-so” (I know of no English word beginning with “pe“ pronounced as “pay”—except the name “Peyton”), so only Pinoys (notably Assumptionistas) “share something to another.” What a relief it was to note that the “to” in your comment has nothing to do with “share,” but is integral to “secrets to professional writing.” Reminds me of this conundrum: Does one pay a call “on” or “to” a high official? Iking Santos and I agreed that “one calls on another,” but “a call is paid to another...”

More power to you, friend.